Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Panzeh
Nov 27, 2006

"..The high ground"

rudatron posted:

Whether or not Goebbels was directly responsible for any deaths isn't really relevant? He was an avid supporter and someone to whom the rise of the Nazi party was instrumental, and he did what he did knowing full well what the Nazis would do when they rose to power. That's guilt enough.

I mean the better comparison here isn't to the Nazis, but to things like organized crime. RICO laws already allow you to charge people involved in organized crime, even if they don't themselves take part in criminal activity.

Hans Fritszche, the guy they tried to get when they couldn't get Goebbels, was acquitted.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Panzeh
Nov 27, 2006

"..The high ground"
Speer was a clever guy, Goering didn't take the trial seriously and thought he would just be able to soapbox. He was probably right in thinking he would be killed no matter what.

Doenitz had the best defense lawyer there who wrote a book on the proceedings. It's why he got a rather light sentence for being Hitler's successor.

Panzeh
Nov 27, 2006

"..The high ground"
To take a slightly different tack, do any of you think any of the acquittals or light sentences were justified?

Panzeh
Nov 27, 2006

"..The high ground"

DeusExMachinima posted:

Goering and Donitz (assuming they didn't do significant political party poo poo) both deserved to be let off, or Allied bomber and sub command deserved to be hung too. But I like to think of myself as a radical moderate so I say just hang the people who carried out the London Blitz and Dresden to make it fair.

Goebbels should've been hung not for what he said but for being a working leader in a government that committed genocide.

fake e: nvm just remembered Goering founded the Gestapo. Shoot the fucker.

Yeah, Goering was one of the early Nazi political guys and he probably was going to hang no matter what but Goering didn't even try to defend himself. He didn't take the trial seriously.

Panzeh
Nov 27, 2006

"..The high ground"

Dr. Fishopolis posted:

I never said it said anything different. Britain wasn't explicitly bombing cities until after the Butt report, they were still targeting factories and military installations.

You're missing a major element. Harris and Churchill's plan from 1936 onward was to use Bomber Command to win the war entirely from the air. The whole purpose of the bombing strategy was to avoid committing ground troops and ending up entrenched for years like last time. Nearly a third of Britain's entire war effort was devoted to the bombing campaign. The Butt report stated explicitly and with evidence that the entire strategy was useless.


That's the entire point. Those are not your only options. You could also take the immense amount of resources it takes to churn out bombers and ordinance and use it for literally anything else that's provably more effective. You could have dismantled the Luftwaffe years earlier if you committed those factories, engineers and pilots to fighters instead. Maybe you could have created more armored divisions. Maybe with those divisions you could have defended France. One thing's for certain, they would have ended up buying a shitload less stuff from America, and they definitely would have staved off the financial collapse of the Empire for at least a few years.

Bombing just plain didn't loving work. The bombs were so inaccurate as to be ineffective against any legitimate war targets. the British knew it, and they did it anyway, and the cost to the world was immense. Churchill had the good sense to regret it after Dresden, but Harris never did.

To be fair, the advocates of bombing as the primary strategy also advocated dropping poison gas on cities, but i'm not sure that would've changed much.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Panzeh
Nov 27, 2006

"..The high ground"

Brainiac Five posted:

Allied admirals argued that they couldn't prosecute him for unrestricted submarine warfare when they had practiced it themselves.

It was Doenitz's lawyer that made the argument. He got Nimitz to write a memo that he had ordered unrestricted submarine warfare. The judges agreed not to consider it in the sentence.

As I said before, he had the best lawyer there.

  • Locked thread